There’s no doubt that Donald Trump has said many things that would have been political suicide for any other Republican candidate. And almost every time he made one of these shocking statements, political analysts on both the left and the right predicted that he’d lose supporters because of it. But as we have clearly seen over the past year, they were dead wrong every time. Trump appears to be almost totally bulletproof.

The only thing that might be more perplexing than the psychology of Donald Trump is the psychology of his supporters. In their eyes, The Donald can do no wrong. Even Trump himself seems to be astonished by this phenomenon. "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK? It's, like, incredible."

Senator John McCain, who has been a regular target for Trump during his campaign, has a simple explanation for his unwavering support. “What he did was he fired up the crazies.”

While the former Republican presidential nominee may be on to something, he doesn’t exactly provide a very satisfying scientific explanation. So how exactly are Trump loyalists psychologically or neurologically different from everyone else? What is going on in their brains that makes them so blindly devoted?

1. The Dunning-Kruger Effect

Some believe that many of those who support Donald Trump do so because of ignorance — basically they are under-informed or misinformed about the issues at hand. When Trump tells them that crime is skyrocketing in the United States, or that the economy is the worst it’s ever been, they simply take his word for it.

The seemingly obvious solution would be to try to reach those people through political ads, expert opinions, and logical arguments that educate with facts. Except none of those things seem to be swaying any Trump supporters from his side, despite great efforts to deliver this information to them directly.

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed. This creates a double burden.

Studies have shown that people who lack expertise in some area of knowledge often have a cognitive bias that prevents them from realizing that they lack expertise. As psychologist David Dunning puts it in an op-ed for Politico, “The knowledge and intelligence that are required to be good at a task are often the same qualities needed to recognize that one is not good at that task — and if one lacks such knowledge and intelligence, one remains ignorant that one is not good at the task. This includes political judgment.” Essentially, they’re not smart enough to realize they’re dumb.

And if one is under the illusion that they have sufficient or even superior knowledge, then they have no reason to defer to anyone else’s judgment. This helps explain why even nonpartisan experts — like military generals and Independent former Mayor of New York/billionaire CEO Michael Bloomberg — as well as some respected Republican politicians, don’t seem to be able to say anything that can change the minds of loyal Trump followers.

Out of immense frustration, some of us may feel the urge to shake a Trump supporter and say, “Hey! Don’t you realize that he’s an idiot?!” No. They don’t. That may be hard to fathom, but that’s the nature of the Dunning-Kruger effect — one’s ignorance is completely invisible to them.

2. Hypersensitivity to Threat

Science has unequivocally shown that the conservative brain has an exaggerated fear response when faced with stimuli that may be perceived as threatening. A 2008 study in the journal Science found that conservatives have a stronger physiological reaction to startling noises and graphic images compared to liberals. A brain-imaging study published in Current Biology revealed that those who lean right politically tend to have a larger amygdala — a structure that is electrically active during states of fear and anxiety. And a 2014 fMRI study found that it is possible to predict whether someone is a liberal or conservative simply by looking at their brain activity while they view threatening or disgusting images, such as mutilated bodies. Specifically, the brains of self-identified conservatives generated more activity overall in response to the disturbing images.

So how does this help explain the unbridled loyalty of Trump supporters? These brain responses are automatic, and not influenced by logic or reason. As long as Trump continues his fear mongering by constantly portraying Muslims and Mexican immigrants as imminent dangers, many conservative brains will involuntarily light up like light bulbs being controlled by a switch. Fear keeps his followers energized and focused on safety. And when you think you’ve found your protector, you become less concerned with remarks that would normally be seen as highly offensive.

The theory is based on the fact that humans have a unique awareness of their own mortality. The inevitably of one’s death creates existential terror and anxiety that is always residing below the surface. In order to manage this terror, humans adopt cultural worldviews — like religions, political ideologies, and national identities — that act as a buffer by instilling life with meaning and value.

Terror Management Theory predicts that when people are reminded of their own mortality, which happens with fear mongering, they will more strongly defend those who share their worldviews and national or ethnic identity, and act out more aggressively towards those who do not. Hundreds of studies have confirmed this hypothesis, and some have specifically shown that triggering thoughts of death tends to shift people towards the right.

Not only do death reminders increase nationalism, they influence actual voting habits in favor of more conservative presidential candidates. And more disturbingly, in a study with American students, scientists found that making mortality salient increased support for extreme military interventions by American forces that could kill thousands of civilians overseas. Interestingly, the effect was present only in conservatives, which can likely be attributed to their heightened fear response.

By constantly emphasizing existential threat, Trump creates a psychological condition that makes the brain respond positively rather than negatively to bigoted statements and divisive rhetoric. Liberals and Independents who have been puzzled over why Trump hasn’t lost supporters after such highly offensive comments need look no further than Terror Management Theory.

4. High Attentional Engagement

According to a recent study that monitored brain activity while participants watched 40 minutes of political ads and debate clips from the presidential candidates, Donald Trump is unique in his ability to keep the brain engaged. While Hillary Clinton could only hold attention for so long, Trump kept both attention and emotional arousal high throughout the viewing session. This pattern of activity was seen even when Trump made remarks that individuals didn’t necessarily agree with. His showmanship and simple messages clearly resonate at a visceral level.

Essentially, the loyalty of Trump supporters may in part be explained by America’s addiction with entertainment and reality TV. To some, it doesn’t matter what Trump actually says because he’s so amusing to watch. With Donald, you are always left wondering what outrageous thing he is going to say or do next. He keeps us on the edge of our seat, and for that reason, some Trump supporters will forgive anything he says. They are happy as long as they are kept entertained.

Of course these explanations do not apply to all Trump supporters. In fact, some are likely intelligent people who know better, but are supporting Trump to be rebellious or to introduce chaos into the system. They may have such distaste for the establishment and Hillary Clinton that their vote for Trump is a symbolic middle finger directed at Washington.

So what can we do to potentially change the minds of Trump loyalists before voting day in November? As a cognitive neuroscientist, it grieves me to say that there may be nothing we can do. The overwhelming majority of these people may be beyond reach, at least in the short term. The best we can do is to motivate everyone else to get out to the booths and check the box that doesn’t belong to a narcissistic nationalist who has the potential to damage the nation beyond repair.....

I decided to copy and paste this article here instead of just posting the hyperlink. Those with such a halo effect toward Trump might not even stop to read it. Their minds are already made up. There has not been much that has changed since the above was written except perhaps for those who voted for Trump and have the sense to now regret it.

Is this country really in a far better place than it was before because of him? Mira!

“How can a bird that is born for joySit in a cage and sing?” ― William Blake

Much domestic violence and abuse, men hitting, punching, and beating women occurs because a low-quality male "scores" a high-quality female, and refuses to "let her go".

Once a woman gives-up her virginity, or sex, to a low-quality male then the low-quality male believes he "owns" her. She is his property. And this is accurate. Because women giving-up sex is a form of Investment. Females willingly, choosingly, give-up a large piece of Self-worth, Self-esteem, and Self-confidence to a male, when he "scores" her. Females often feel that domestic violence is "my fault" because they have already led the male on, and given positive and affirmative signals.

Many times women are "surprised" by a male, previously acting as a "nice-guy", who then becomes aggressive, abusive, mean, or "evil" when the relationship is on the rocks. Females are "surprised" when the male turns on her, and begins to exert violence and fear, in order to keep her locked under his control. I believe this is due to a lack of education, wisdom, and intelligence, in many women. Many females have an average and low intelligence, and cannot recognize the signs of a potentially-abusive boyfriend.

Women are responsible for domestic violence, against them, when Sex is put in the larger perspective. The statistics show that rape and domestic violence is mostly caused by "boyfriends" or husbands. But how could that be possible, unless the female has already given him sexual-rites and access? The main problem is, women are never held accountable for anything, in general, and seen as innocent-victims, when truthfully, they willfully and choosingly "picked" such mates and males to begin with. Rather domestic violence and "men are evil" come after-the-fact, after the abuse, and after the female is already in far over her head. She regrets her (mistaken, poor choice) and wants to re-neg. She wants out, and believes, that the rest of society 'owes' her forgiveness and compassion for the choices she already made, willingly.

I'm not implying that women and females trapped in abusive relationships "deserve to be in them" or "don't deserve out of them". Rather I'm saying that women are partially, or wholly, responsible for entering into them, especially when females are young.

The main method of preventing such occurrences are the presence of a strong, Prideful father, who can protect his daughter, or brothers who could also perform the same function. This is why daughters and women with strong-caring fathers, generally are not abused by boyfriends, men, or husbands, compared to single-mother or divorced-mother daughters.

In the end, all fault and responsibility is put onto the 'male' gender. Men are responsible for the abuse (not women for choosing to begin the relationship). And men are responsible for "fixing" it. Men are also responsible for Patronage and being "good fathers". Feminism will never concede responsibility, on behalf of the female gender, ever.

This is why Women are discounted in general, deserve disrespect, or even contempt. If a whole gender absolutely refuses any form of culpability, capability for responsibility, and absolute victimhood, then they must be treated as such -- absolute victims, incapable of any form authority, leadership, or self-responsibility. Absolute Dependents, never Independent. If Feminism truly wanted "Independence", or any woman wanted "equal respect with men", then women would band-together and begin taking responsibility for anything. But they don't. And they won't. And so, women cannot be respected (morally) for their poor choices throughout life.

Certainly women are responsible for ignoring warning signs. I can't see where this would ever make them wholly responsible for the behavior of the men - and reading the previous post this is one of the options and the main thrust of the post is to give them most of the responsiblity. If the men are mere automatons who inevitably respond with violence after the courtship...iow if we view them as pure natural beings simply living out the essence in a predetermined manner, then we can hardly on the other hand view women as free agents who caused the relationship, and caused the man to get violent. She would be her version of an automaton. And the men are also responsible for playing the nicey, nice bullshit courtship game and not knowing themselves enough to realize they probably hate the woman they are courting. And the men are responsible for getting involved with women who will make them go violent.

There are many people who see women as pure victims and that seems useless to me. It means the women can do nothing to avoid problems, they might as well throw a dart at a map and choose their partner by the address. But we also don't have to pretend that men have to go to violence when they don't get what they want. I mean, seriously, if you hate the person you are with the way they are, leave. Or do everything short of violence to see if some kind of postive change can start.

But that's right, if you raise the level to violence you better have a damn good excuse. And 'she doesn't want me anymore' just doesn't cut it. Or 'she thinks she gets to decide things also', just doesn't cut it. Men need to man up and actually feel their fucking feelings, like many men actually do. Violence in relationships, especially something regular is an addiction. It is self-medicating. They do not want to feel helpless, which they do feel. They do not want to feel their fear, which is there. So they hit, because this seems like taking some kind of control. It's a pussy move. It's hiding from the pain that is always possible in relationships. Or hiding from not being treated like a master to a slave. Or hiding from the loss of control we all have when we want something.

That's fucking right, it fucking hurts. Relationships can fucking hurt. Deal with that shit without self-medicating.

Of course having good father helps any child with anything. Having a mother who respects herself in relation to the father will also help the daughter not put up with people who feel creepy or give off little warning signs as the courtship moves towards marriage or partnership.

Honest parents who actually know what they are feeling and who they are, of course that would help. Fathers treating their daughters with respect and not using violence, that also helps. Getting into some insightful discussions of people and their motives, desires, foibles, bullshit, confusion, self-delusions, etc....that all can help to. FAmilies often do not talk about the most important things. The traditional stoic male father sitting on his emotions, except for occasional anger, has not protected women. A real insight into all that is in men as she grows up is much better prevention.

But you go up to violence, you need a better excuse then the person who does not go up to violence.

It is sexist to present men's violence as simply a determined thing. They are like robots in this model. Only the woman can prevent being hit.

I do get that this is coming as a response to cultural elements that see women as having no part in consequences, but throwing a weird distorted view of men out really doesn't help.

That violence is fear-based. I am not saying that anger isn't in there also. But the choice to up the ante to violence, that's because they are afraid.

FAthers need to show their sons that actually feeling fear and grief and being able to speak from that are also not helping anybody get a grounded view of what is happening.

And this does not mean that only soft emotions are OK. Anger and rage have their place, but I see men skipping over any feeling that makes them feel too weak, even those feelings ARE their feelings. And I see men living out lives as partial humans. Women certainly do this also, with their own distorted mirror version.

Perhaps a man ought to have only as many rights as he would deign to give a woman.

What a retarded sentiment. Not that I expected more from you.

Your statement begs the question: Do you not believe in fairness, justice and balance?I was being facetious when I wrote that BUT I think that both men and women need to learn to have regard for one another, at least under sane, normal circumstances. Aside from that, it is far beyond tricky. Insofar as what I wrote above, that might become a slippery slope. I am not sure just how that would work out.

Not that I expected more from you

Very often what we expect[ed] is what we get, no more nor less.I will try to imagine that somewhere in the future I will not see your insults towards other posters. One thing I will say for you though is that it is not women alone who have a monopoly on these kind of posts. That may be a positive.

“Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.” If you're aiming for something, even if you don't achieve it, you'll still be somewhere better than where you started. You can achieve other great things while trying to do your first, even if you don't achieve your original goal.

How about instead everybody has to earn their rights, so if women want the same rights as men, they have to defeat men in conflict. Of course, if they do, they could take more rights.

Which rights are you speaking about ~ those inalienable rights which we are all entitled to unless we abuse them and lose them? I am not sure what you mean by *defeat men in conflict*. It seems to me that women are still fighting to receive the same rights which many men had in the past and still are denying them whether due to fear or lack of consciousness. Those fearful men with a lack of consciousness who still believe that they are living in a patriarchal world, and perhaps in a sense we still are (I do not know) would try to deny women the same rights as they have, those same rights which women already have a RIGHT too. The more these men try to put women down, the higher these women rise up to meet the challenge.

This would mean people would have to demonstrate competence and worthiness, instead of merely declaring it without having to back it up with action. Just asking to be given things is parasitic.

[/quote]

What do women have to do to show their competence and so-called worthiness? Go off to war and fight, become firefighters, become police officers, become whatever they choose to while some men still live in caves, stand in solidarity and report their sexual abusers? et cetera, et cetera...what came about long before and shall come about in the future...

Have a good day.

“How can a bird that is born for joySit in a cage and sing?” ― William Blake

Which rights are you speaking about ~ those inalienable rights which we are all entitled to unless we abuse them and lose them?

Rights aren't inalienable and nobody is entitled to anything. Claims of entitlement are parasitic.

What are you not sure about? Men would have to be awfully stupid and weakened to give women rights for free. If women manage to defeat men, aka wound them until they cannot fight back or kill them, then they can have their rights.

If they cannot or if they don't even dare to try, then they can't have their rights.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:I can't see where this would ever make them wholly responsible for the behavior of the men

The problem is that society and humanity in-general, puts the responsibility of average men at 75-100%. Women have 25-0% responsibility. So it's "not fair". I'm not saying that it should be. I simply want to demonstrate how, in-reality, females have very low moral standards. Men, and women, do not expect much "responsibility" from women, mostly because of the female irrational and emotional mentality. Women cannot be trusted; because women cannot reason. And women are morally bankrupt, because they are not, and continually refuse to be 100% self-responsible, and take responsibility for others.

It seems to me that when women do try to take responsibility "actually it is my fault that my boyfriend punched me in the face a few times" that society responds with "No-no-no, you are an innocent little angel, VICTIM, and it's actually not your fault AT ALL". So it's negative-negative. Even when women may feel inclined to take responsibility, (Modern-Feminist) society rebukes them, and keeps them morally-void.

I'm not saying it's impossible for women to have a Moral, Responsible status. I do believe it can occur, and probably in the most Noble and intelligent of women. However, even those (most noble) types, will still only gain a fraction of Morality (Self-responsibility) compared to men. So even then, it will not be "fair", and definitely not "equal".

I don't believe in Equality though. Women should be accepted as a low Moral status, having a low expectation for Self-Responsibility, in-general.

Most domestic violence and abuse could be prevented by women, by screening their mates better and longer, which intelligent women do anyway. Intelligent women tend not to allow low-quality males to have power over them. And intelligent women, almost always, have a strong-father figure present in their lives, or brothers, who would further protect her honor and integrity. Lower intelligent women, average, do not. It's not a coincidence, that such women come from single-parent, single-mother, absent-father homes.

Karpel Tunnel wrote: - and reading the previous post this is one of the options and the main thrust of the post is to give them most of the responsiblity. If the men are mere automatons who inevitably respond with violence after the courtship...iow if we view them as pure natural beings simply living out the essence in a predetermined manner, then we can hardly on the other hand view women as free agents who caused the relationship, and caused the man to get violent. She would be her version of an automaton. And the men are also responsible for playing the nicey, nice bullshit courtship game and not knowing themselves enough to realize they probably hate the woman they are courting. And the men are responsible for getting involved with women who will make them go violent.

There are many people who see women as pure victims and that seems useless to me. It means the women can do nothing to avoid problems, they might as well throw a dart at a map and choose their partner by the address. But we also don't have to pretend that men have to go to violence when they don't get what they want. I mean, seriously, if you hate the person you are with the way they are, leave. Or do everything short of violence to see if some kind of postive change can start.

But that's right, if you raise the level to violence you better have a damn good excuse. And 'she doesn't want me anymore' just doesn't cut it. Or 'she thinks she gets to decide things also', just doesn't cut it. Men need to man up and actually feel their fucking feelings, like many men actually do. Violence in relationships, especially something regular is an addiction. It is self-medicating. They do not want to feel helpless, which they do feel. They do not want to feel their fear, which is there. So they hit, because this seems like taking some kind of control. It's a pussy move. It's hiding from the pain that is always possible in relationships. Or hiding from not being treated like a master to a slave. Or hiding from the loss of control we all have when we want something.

That's fucking right, it fucking hurts. Relationships can fucking hurt. Deal with that shit without self-medicating.

Of course having good father helps any child with anything. Having a mother who respects herself in relation to the father will also help the daughter not put up with people who feel creepy or give off little warning signs as the courtship moves towards marriage or partnership.

Honest parents who actually know what they are feeling and who they are, of course that would help. Fathers treating their daughters with respect and not using violence, that also helps. Getting into some insightful discussions of people and their motives, desires, foibles, bullshit, confusion, self-delusions, etc....that all can help to. FAmilies often do not talk about the most important things. The traditional stoic male father sitting on his emotions, except for occasional anger, has not protected women. A real insight into all that is in men as she grows up is much better prevention.

But you go up to violence, you need a better excuse then the person who does not go up to violence.

It is sexist to present men's violence as simply a determined thing. They are like robots in this model. Only the woman can prevent being hit.

I do get that this is coming as a response to cultural elements that see women as having no part in consequences, but throwing a weird distorted view of men out really doesn't help.

That violence is fear-based. I am not saying that anger isn't in there also. But the choice to up the ante to violence, that's because they are afraid.

FAthers need to show their sons that actually feeling fear and grief and being able to speak from that are also not helping anybody get a grounded view of what is happening.

And this does not mean that only soft emotions are OK. Anger and rage have their place, but I see men skipping over any feeling that makes them feel too weak, even those feelings ARE their feelings. And I see men living out lives as partial humans. Women certainly do this also, with their own distorted mirror version.

Males can be stupid and morally bankrupt too, not just women. But the point of this thread, and the ongoing point, is that women are viewed by society at large, and "Feminism", to be completely innocent.

Low-intelligent, low-quality males, obviously are more Emotional and thus would be prone to use violence (the Male-advantage) over a girlfriend, to keep her put, and to live in fear. It happens very often. Especially when a low-quality male scores an attractive, beautiful, pretty girlfriend.

You've got to be remarkably stupid to think that a stupid man could outsmart the entire GOP and DNC with a tenth of the funding of other main candidates.Even George W Bush is ten times as smart as every single journalist in the country. But Trump outplayed all the Republicans too, if you dont remember. Of course you don't. You don't have the span of attention to remember that there is something to remember about that.

Logically then your prediction is not going to come true. FDR came to power under the exact opposite circumstances, a completely stretched out economy, where today we have a powerfully consolidating one, even as the Fed is now going against all Trumps recommendations, this is only allowed by the immense growth.

Furthermore, the fact that the lefts violent hatred of white males amounts in them (including you) getting behind Biden and Avenatti is proof of their absoute lack of self-awareness. I believe thats called insanity.

People with brittle egos envy Trump. Thats the only explanation I have of the astounding degree of ignorance in your camp, the perfect disregard of all the unrivalled good he has been doing for the People.

Keep clawing at the senate door and yelping on the gallery and murdering Jews, you fools. We are ready for whatever war you plunge us into.

Perhaps a man ought to have only as many rights as he would deign to give a woman. Then perhaps we might all learn something.

What does that mean?

That was *quick* thinking as opposed to *slow* thinking. It just popped into my head. At least you are cordial about it. After I posted those words to you, I also posted them to another ~~ residue I suppose ~ and I was called an *embecile*. Of course, on reflection, I can see quite a number of both positive and negative attributes which might refer to me ~ at different given times. I may have even called myself an embecile at one time or another but I ask you: How do words like that win arguments or make friends although I must say that uttering the words may be a catharsis for some BUT what would be taken away if after the words were typed, they would be deleted. Would the power of the catharis be lost? That is quite enough rambling. lol

I do not believe that I was coming from an *eye for an eye* perspective, a revenge perspective. I think that men and women need to learn to put themselves in each other's places. You used the word *empathy* above. That does call for empathy and openness and a willingness to do just that. I wonder how many individuals are capable of that? We are fearful, stubborn creatures who like to exist within our own comfort zone, unwilling to reflect and to take that leap into the dark to see how the other might feel.

Why are we still talking as if women don't have equal rights? It pains me to see this.

What is it that pains you, Barbarianhorde, to see that women still do not have all of the same rights as men do or the talking of it?

When are women going to make use of these rights to show where they can do better than men?

I have been accused of being a feminist. lol. I do not so much think in terms of women doing better than men but of women doing just as well as men and having the opportunity to prove that to themselves and to others. But what do you think? Do you believe that in order to balance things, many women may feel that they have to do better than men or that this can even be a good thing?

As I put in another post, women are already doing that. Firefighters, police officers, soldiers, astronauts,(not sure how many there are) pilots, fighter pilots, truck drivers lol, ad continuum. Have you ever heard of Rosie the Riveter?

I haven't seen any improvement in empathy or responsibility the world since women got equal rights, have you?

I am not sure how to answer this question. Anyway, you have to look for the empathy and the sense of responsibility in the world. Maybe you cannot necessarily try to connect this lack with woman's rights. Consider all of the women during the wars and at other times who fought not just for women's right, but for the rights of every human being, putting their own lives in jeopardy for a cause, to save individual people and groups, like the Jews, like the African Americans, like the starving children in Africa and elsewhere. If you cannot see those two things in the world, then perhaps you are not looking.

Did you have a lawyer? Could you sue her in civil court?

Thats very American. I cant go into it like that.

Does America have a monopoly on civil law suits? Is the legal system so different in other free countries?

.... I do not necessarily believe in that thing called karma but I think that at some point the woman will reap the consequences, if she has not already, of what she has done to you, due to her behavior and character.

Well sure I wouldn't want to trade places. Someone who does that must be in dulling pain.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Perhaps certain people are simply vindictive and controlling and enjoy seeing other people hurt. But I will grant you that what you say ~ in regard to other individuals ~ may be the case. As Jung said: "Only the tortured torture". What are we to do in that case? That is not a rhetorical question.

Yes, thank god my closest family and friends returned. They all were very surprised when they finally let me talk. Now I have some admiration, quite a bit actually, for how I pulled through.

What do you mean by "They all were very surprised when they finally let me talk." But you do not need to rehash. No explanation needed.

If we could only be happy if we were perfect and complete Id never have one happy second in my life.

Define happiness as you know it? What makes you happy?Which would you prefer ~ a greater degree of happiness and contentment or of struggle?

I personally do not think that we have anything to worry about there. I feel the same way too. I think that it is only within those moments when we experience perhaps some kind of perfection and completeness within us, perhaps when we are somewhere in the zone or in the pocket doing something which we love or which is a struggle, and I know that I have, when everything just seems to come together, somehow. Could we appreciate those moments if they were not so rare?

No, I am happy that we didn't send the planet into nuclear winter. You know the story. I love Trump. I think he saved the day. Lets maybe not discuss that here though its endless.

Yes, I know that you and a few others here live in Trump's world. I actually voted for him. Let us see by the end of next week if I can be somewhat happy that I voted for him. Quien sabe. End of discussion.

I changed my mind about End of Discussion. I wish that someone would point out to me the many postive things which he has done for the nation and the world at large.

I gotta say no one asks to be born either,

Well, I am agnostic and I certainly do not know if there is life after death so how can I know if no one ever asks to be born. lol I would be quite curious though to know how many would prefer to have their memories wiped out ~ in essence asking not to have been born.

life is painful for everyone

For most, yes, and for many, all of the time but not for everyone all of the time.We always seem to take for granted what is going on in other parts of the world and even here at home. We are such a selfish, hedonistic, greedy bunch. I wonder how many would have a change of heart and transformation if they took the time to reflect/to dwell on how the others live.

The sex slaves on the markets of Libya which was Hillarys proud wardeed (she actually was proud of that coup on tv) cant go to therapy, they will never make it out alive likely.

Is it as simple as all that? Is Clinton and Obama directly and solely responsible for what is going on there? I am not really politically inclined and am not a political analyst. One might need to have the wisdom of a King Solomon and all of the direct knowledge of what is happening in the world and be able to see into the future and back into the past.

So what are we doing for these people?

[quote][quote]Ive got some reading for you if you're interested in my side. Thanks for your patient reply.

So what do you think of that image ~ spooky spam ~ "so whose going to take one for the team and kill Cavanaugh and the fact that 28 actually liked it?"

Do you think that this person, woman or man (can we know for sure) needs to take responsibility for her/his words? She may or may not have meant it but there are a lot of crazies out there, and I would include her or him within that group, even if she was just sadly looking for attention, showing off which makes her no less responsible for her stupidity and callousness.

Personally, I would have her or him spend some time in jail. Words can be extremely powerful and can have terrible consequences. If we want to indulge in such *freedom of speech* which can cause harm to others, we must be prepared to *pay the piper*.

The sad thing is that it is too late for the person who has been harmed or killed. We really do live in an insane world.

Do you consider this to be "freedom of speech" which should be allowed?I am not even sure if it ought to be allowed even though the person would have to take responsibility for it legally speaking. But we cannot stop people from what they say unfortunately or can we? Things like this being said. The repercussions come too late for narcissists and so-called privileged characters who believe they have the right to spill this venom.

“How can a bird that is born for joySit in a cage and sing?” ― William Blake

Arcturus, you voted for Trump? You are a hero. Despite how you feel now you already did your part in protecting millions of Arabs from isis armies of death.To vote for Trump despite the social pressure, especially as a woman, shows a compassionate heart and independent mind.

Arcturus Descending wrote:That was *quick* thinking as opposed to *slow* thinking. It just popped into my head. At least you are cordial about it. After I posted those words to you, I also posted them to another ~~ residue I suppose ~ and I was called an *embecile*. Of course, on reflection, I can see quite a number of both positive and negative attributes which might refer to me ~ at different given times. I may have even called myself an embecile at one time or another but I ask you: How do words like that win arguments or make friends although I must say that uttering the words may be a catharsis for some BUT what would be taken away if after the words were typed, they would be deleted. Would the power of the catharis be lost? That is quite enough rambling. lol

Well to call someone an imbecile is basically ending the discussion. And I think that was probably the point. People get hurt quick when their race or gender is being generalized and attacked. We all see the ugliest sides of us all because of it.

I do not believe that I was coming from an *eye for an eye* perspective, a revenge perspective. I think that men and women need to learn to put themselves in each other's places. You used the word *empathy* above. That does call for empathy and openness and a willingness to do just that. I wonder how many individuals are capable of that? We are fearful, stubborn creatures who like to exist within our own comfort zone, unwilling to reflect and to take that leap into the dark to see how the other might feel.

Yes, I think now it is time for women to place themselves in mens shoes. Where Im from at least men are virtually an extinct species when it comes a mans Mind. In America it is less bad. I think women do still put themselves in mens shoes here and there, there,

Why are we still talking as if women don't have equal rights? It pains me to see this.

What is it that pains you, Barbarianhorde, to see that women still do not have all of the same rights as men do or the talking of it?

Where is the law that says women don't haver equal rights?I tell you, it is in Mecca and Medina and Brussels.

It pains me that in Europe women will no longer have equal rights because of the tremendous islamic dominance. I am glad American women will be spared this buy Trump and other brave men and women fighting for each other.

When are women going to make use of these rights to show where they can do better than men?

I have been accused of being a feminist. lol. I do not so much think in terms of women doing better than men but of women doing just as well as men and having the opportunity to prove that to themselves and to others. But what do you think? Do you believe that in order to balance things, many women may feel that they have to do better than men or that this can even be a good thing?

I always figured women were essentially more keen and smart than men until groups of women started attacking men in very ungracious ways. I slowly realized many women are worthless pieces of trash, just like I knew many men are. Just, selfish, blind, black galled sadistic masochistic and irrational and loud, totally good for noting except causing miserable times for other people especially their children if they have them.

Now, I only respect people who prove to be worthy of my respect. Like you, for example. For me the issue was never whether women were equal to me, it was more if men could be equal to women. But thats how I grew up. And how a lot of boys are now growing up, even worse. They are taught it is fundamentally bad to be a male. Some will end up rapists. I can feel it coming in the air tonight. Oh yeah. And girls are being taught it is fundamentally good to be a girl. So they grow up without compassion, without knowing good from bad.

But thankfully all smart humans will step out of this machine and join the new movement where it is taken for granted that gender isn't a criterium for human worth, as we always did. Only stupid people think it was ever really an issue. Because it was only ever really an issue with stupid people. If you read literature and correspondences up to the 19 century man always respected woman far more than a feminist does. If women don't like that sort of respect, then I think that is sad.

As I put in another post, women are already doing that. Firefighters, police officers, soldiers, astronauts,(not sure how many there are) pilots, fighter pilots, truck drivers lol, ad continuum. Have you ever heard of Rosie the Riveter?

No but to be honest none of that evokes my respect especially. I like strong characters, good human beings, people who stand up for their family, etcetera. I don't care what job they have. I think an ER nurse is much rougher than a fighter pilot, as is a forth grade teacher. FAR more important. A fighter pilot is just a lucky basterd. Like an astronaut.

I haven't seen any improvement in empathy or responsibility the world since women got equal rights, have you?

I am not sure how to answer this question. Anyway, you have to look for the empathy and the sense of responsibility in the world. Maybe you cannot necessarily try to connect this lack with woman's rights. Consider all of the women during the wars and at other times who fought not just for women's right, but for the rights of every human being, putting their own lives in jeopardy for a cause, to save individual people and groups, like the Jews, like the African Americans, like the starving children in Africa and elsewhere. If you cannot see those two things in the world, then perhaps you are not looking.

Empathy necessarily leads to womens rights, but womens rights don't necessarily lead to empathy. Thats what I see in the world. I think it is because along with womens rights we also are taught male guilt. So that good men are obstructed in favour of hypocrites and rapists, elected by their fancy talk about how women are superior while they rape women left rand right.

Its just a bit insulting to forget the millions of MEN that fought for womens right and died for it.

Does America have a monopoly on civil law suits? Is the legal system so different in other free countries?

It is literally nothing like it. I have never even heard of a person who sued another. Only the state sues. And no jury. The judge gets to decide it all.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Perhaps certain people are simply vindictive and controlling and enjoy seeing other people hurt. But I will grant you that what you say ~ in regard to other individuals ~ may be the case. As Jung said: "Only the tortured torture". What are we to do in that case? That is not a rhetorical question.

Thats very mean to the tortured. Its just not true in my experience. Many cruel tyrants had perfectly fine upbringing and many tortured people are perfectly peaceful and loving.

It is something I hate, to always shove responsibility for someones actions away from that someone to a hypothetical other, or just automatically to his parents. I believe in the soul. I believe we come to the world as a defined character. This is a lengthy endless discussion, but just to let you know I put responsibility for torture always only strictly with the torturer. All else perpetuates it.

What do you mean by "They all were very surprised when they finally let me talk." But you do not need to rehash. No explanation needed.

They finally realized I wasn't crazy, or cruel, or violent. For years people would walk out of the room or scream and laugh and cry whenever I opened my mouth to try to defend against accusations - it was from a slapstick movie really, I couldn't do much because everyone was in on it and they all would turn to emotional wrecks as soon as I tried to defend myself, I was the Satan, the scapegoat. I didn't know why and still don't. A lesbian friend of mine said it was penis envy. She said some lesbians are so frustrated about not being a man they do nothing rather than cut a mans dick off, if not real than psychologically. I know you won't take this seriously, because you just don't know this sort of life. But its all pretty damn ugly and real for Northern Europe. Blackmail using the weaknesses of family members because boys are usually very compassionate to their family especially of course their mom. Get to the mom and you get to the boy. Thats how they play it, the feminists.

Did you know there was an actual worked doctrine here in the 80s which said that moms should deprive their sons of love? My mom wad very upset at it then, but it was actually written in popular magazines - feminism is pretty hard core here. So you forgive me if I don't admire the movement so much.

Women have many more rights these days, here in Europe. For example the right to abortion is one right a man doesn't have. A man doesn't get to decide to kill his baby. Only a woman gets to decide to kill her and that mans baby. Just one of those things.

If we could only be happy if we were perfect and complete Id never have one happy second in my life.

Define happiness as you know it? What makes you happy?Which would you prefer ~ a greater degree of happiness and contentment or of struggle?

Happy for me is being in creative action, which always is a state of love. I believe the world is nothing else than something which works on itself to make itself better and better for more and more souls.There is only unfolding. If we stop creating we start dying, and to avoid consciousness of this, people take medicines or go obsessive over something.Get busy living or get busy dying, but the first means: to create. Not just to enjoy or experience. You need to always create situations that could not have existed without you. Then you become eternal you know eternity in your heart. Thats I think what happiness is, going beyond the illusion of the zero sum universe into the truth of the unavoidable.

I personally do not think that we have anything to worry about there. I feel the same way too. I think that it is only within those moments when we experience perhaps some kind of perfection and completeness within us, perhaps when we are somewhere in the zone or in the pocket doing something which we love or which is a struggle, and I know that I have, when everything just seems to come together, somehow. Could we appreciate those moments if they were not so rare?

Yes, they now make up most of my life. I worked all my life for this special intimacy with the cosmos. It grows and grows until it overtakes the whole experience of life.This means that all of life becomes a meaningful struggle, with of course moment sof accomplishment and relief, but never of just trivial or arbitrary labour for causes you might not value or watching tv to zone out or endless small talk to pass time and avoid the truth. None of that exists for me now, only the juicy truth of the struggle to crack the cosmic egg, unite the two worlds the eternal and the not fleeting.

Like dust in a dance, what exists, the dust, or the dance?I say the dance.

No, I am happy that we didn't send the planet into nuclear winter. You know the story. I love Trump. I think he saved the day. Lets maybe not discuss that here though its endless.

Yes, I know that you and a few others here live in Trump's world. I actually voted for him. Let us see by the end of next week if I can be somewhat happy that I voted for him. Quien sabe. End of discussion.

like I said you have good karma because of this. End of discussion.

I changed my mind about End of Discussion. I wish that someone would point out to me the many postive things which he has done for the nation and the world at large.

He has ended the reign of isis, which saved millions form torture. He has ended the nuclear war tensions with Russia, which had whole cities shuffling into nuclear bunkers in case the other won. He has reduced unemployment to under 5 percent and is drawing trillions back into the economy by taxing corporations overseas, just some of the massive accomplishment in only two years, already a hell of a lot more than any other presidents of the last 25 years can say.

I gotta say no one asks to be born either,

Well, I am agnostic and I certainly do not know if there is life after death so how can I know if no one ever asks to be born. lol I would be quite curious though to know how many would prefer to have their memories wiped out ~ in essence asking not to have been born.

Yes, thats definitely granted.

life is painful for everyone

For most, yes, and for many, all of the time but not for everyone all of the time.We always seem to take for granted what is going on in other parts of the world and even here at home. We are such a selfish, hedonistic, greedy bunch. I wonder how many would have a change of heart and transformation if they took the time to reflect/to dwell on how the others live.

If you travel the world and live with people you find out they're all just human and not less greedy or hedonistic anywhere else. Don't feel bad for having a working kitchen. In other countries they might be poorer but there may be less chemicals in the food and tap water. Civilization comes at a price. Arabs most of the time live quite well for example because of the lack of supermarkets and packaged steroid foods, the reality of their foods is great. An Middle Eastern grocery is one of the nicest places in the world. A paradise for a cook. Just to given an example.

The sex slaves on the markets of Libya which was Hillarys proud wardeed (she actually was proud of that coup on tv) cant go to therapy, they will never make it out alive likely.

Is it as simple as all that? Is Clinton and Obama directly and solely responsible for what is going on there?

A handful of high ranked officials, maybe there or four including them and Sarkozy, yes it is purely them. Without them Libya would still be the most literate, most prosperous country of Africa. Now it is a self slave market. And as you can see she is proud of it.

As willing s people were to Balme Kavanaugh for what there was no proof he did, no one is willing o blame Clinton for what she proudly admitted to doing and which is millions of times worse than what Kavanaugh was accused o

I am not really politically inclined and am not a political analyst. One might need to have the wisdom of a King Solomon and all of the direct knowledge of what is happening in the world and be able to see into the future and back into the past.

So what are we doing for these people?

There isn't anything anyone can do now. the spine of the country was broken.

So what do you think of that image ~ spooky spam ~ "so whose going to take one for the team and kill Cavanaugh and the fact that 28 actually liked it?"

Do you think that this person, woman or man (can we know for sure) needs to take responsibility for her/his words? She may or may not have meant it but there are a lot of crazies out there, and I would include her or him within that group, even if she was just sadly looking for attention, showing off which makes her no less responsible for her stupidity and callousness.

Personally, I would have her or him spend some time in jail. Words can be extremely powerful and can have terrible consequences. If we want to indulge in such *freedom of speech* which can cause harm to others, we must be prepared to *pay the piper*.

The sad thing is that it is too late for the person who has been harmed or killed. We really do live in an insane world.

Do you consider this to be "freedom of speech" which should be allowed?I am not even sure if it ought to be allowed even though the person would have to take responsibility for it legally speaking. But we cannot stop people from what they say unfortunately or can we? Things like this being said. The repercussions come too late for narcissists and so-called privileged characters who believe they have the right to spill this venom.

I thin it should be allowed in privater but not in print, there are so many examples of death threats and fictions of the death of the people we love, and it was printed in such classy magazines and newspapers and still is - I think the people running these media outlets deserve the punishment of living their miserable shitty lives without the power to impose that misery on other lives.

It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed. ~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

Fixed Cross wrote:You've got to be remarkably stupid to think that a stupid man could outsmart the entire GOP and DNC with a tenth of the funding of other main candidates.

Who are you talking to? Me? It must be me since I appear to be the only one who is worth putting extra miles on your insult dispenser. Evidently I stimulate your fight/flight mechanism while simultaneously shutting down your frontal lobe.

Trump didn't need to use his money while the MSN was giving him free publicity 24/7.

And even if Mr Hanky were on the ticket next to Hillary, we'd still have a turd for president because a Trump vote was a not-Hillary vote.

Even George W Bush is ten times as smart as every single journalist in the country.

You honestly believe that?

But Trump outplayed all the Republicans too, if you dont remember. Of course you don't. You don't have the span of attention to remember that there is something to remember about that.

Yes, that was the not-politician vote. Again, Mr Hanky qualifies.

Logically then your prediction is not going to come true.

That Biden will be our next president? I hope not.

FDR came to power under the exact opposite circumstances,

Nope. The parallels between Trump and Hoover are startling! Both rich businessmen (only Hoover was self-made while Trump rode daddy's coattails), both implemented tariffs, neither took a salary, neither served in government or military, both came to power at the top of a giant bubble and both exacerbated the periodic capitalistic breakdowns into a depression (Trump hasn't gotten that far yet, but he will with his hoover-esque asinine policies so detrimental to the middle and lower classes).

If not for Hoover (and Coolidge), FDR would have never happened. Trump is Hoover 2.0. Bush was our Coolidge and Obama could have been an FDR if he had balls, but he was a compromising centrist, so the can was kicked down the road and we rest on the precipice. The problem is Biden also will not be an FDR. We need Bernie, but he's so old... idk.

a completely stretched out economy, where today we have a powerfully consolidating one,

even as the Fed is now going against all Trumps recommendations, this is only allowed by the immense growth.

Any other president would have LOVED 2% interest rates, but Trump says it's too much for his fragile bullshit economy to handle. What a buffoon! Should we have 0% rates perpetually???

Furthermore, the fact that the lefts violent hatred of white males amounts in them (including you)

You aren't doing much to make white males more attractive with this dispatch.

getting behind Biden and Avenatti is proof of their absoute lack of self-awareness.

I wouldn't trust either of them behind me.

People with brittle egos envy Trump. Thats the only explanation I have of the astounding degree of ignorance in your camp, the perfect disregard of all the unrivalled good he has been doing for the People.

What good? Higher taxes for the poor and more debt in order to pay for whopping tax breaks for the rich? And if not for the liberal judges voting against Gorsuch et al (5-4), we'd be subject to warrantless searches and seizures of our phone records https://www.thedailybeast.com/would-the ... -cellphone

Trump is a moron with no talent for picking talent as evidenced by the fact that everyone he hires either quits, gets fired, or Trump complains about them incessantly. I doubt he could tie his own shoelaces.

Keep clawing at the senate door and yelping on the gallery and murdering Jews, you fools. We are ready for whatever war you plunge us into.

Im from a family of political power (not on my fathers side) so I don't look the way you do, academically, but psychologically. I do mean that about Bush, because to be a journalist, one needs to be fundamentally uninvested, which eases the mind. Its not a challenging job. If you look at Bush in talkshows, you see how his wits intimidate his hosts. He got elected on a very keen psychological insight. He performed his puppet duties then for the masters that were then in play. But Trump freed the horse from these masters. Look at Bushes face during the Trump inauguration. That was the first time he really looked confused. All the other stuff was sardonic clowning.

Also of course the minor detail that Trump saved your skin from nuclear burns. Either you are too ignorant of what was happening in Europe under Clintons Statesec stewardship or or you dont take it all that gravely - in both cases, you're trivial in these matters despite a good IQ. I don't know what the problem is in your mind, why convictions don't connect to arguments if not a kind of virginity before the real world. The left is made out of such symptoms of inexperience, IQs go to waste in glib non sequiturs with a few sprinkled factoids.

Id like to see you try t hold up in a conversation with Trump. He'd first ask you what youve done.I imagine you'd have nothing to say, and Id like to see you worm your way out of that, and him smiling and patting you on the back like with Ali G.

Intelligence that connects hypotheticals is not the same as intelligence that tests itself. The two species both occur at once in a powerful mind, but - well you see where im going with this. Or no you probably don't. I mean that you need to fucking go out and verify your claims before you develop a really slick shell of self indulgent slime and actually start becoming dumb.

Fixed Cross wrote:Im from a family of political power (not on my fathers side) so I don't look the way you do, academically, but psychologically.

I'm sorry.

I do mean that about Bush, because to be a journalist, one needs to be fundamentally uninvested, which eases the mind. Its not a challenging job.

I'll concede that journalism is the dentistry to medicine, but some of those journalist are pretty sharp while Bush has been generally and unanimously regarded as dull, at best.

In 2001, political psychologist Aubrey Immelman made an IQ estimation of G. W. Bush based on the SAT Reasoning Test results of Bush (1206) and Al Gore, who achieved IQ scores of 133 and 134 in his school years: "It's tempting to employ Al Gore's IQ:SAT ratio of 134:135 as a formula for estimating Bush's probable intelligence quotient — an exercise in fuzzy statistics that predicts a score of 119."[7]

A 2006 study analyzing presidential IQs by Dean Keith Simonton of U.C. Davis appeared in the journal Political Psychology. Simonton's study analyzed the results of varied and often subjective historical material using the tools of historiometry. It estimated IQs for all US presidents, and validated the headline of the hoax, which stated Bush's was the lowest of any president in the last 50 years, though it estimates his IQ considerably higher (by more than two standard deviations) than the 91 suggested in the hoax report. It rated G.W. Bush second to last since 1900, with an estimated IQ of 119 (the estimates ranged from 111 to 139). Bush's estimated IQ was less than those estimated for Grant (120), Monroe (124), and Harding (124). The same study estimated president Bill Clinton's IQ at 149, behind only those of Kennedy (151), Jefferson (154) and John Quincy Adams (169).[8]

If you look at Bush in talkshows, you see how his wits intimidate his hosts.

Are you sure you're not thinking of Bill Clinton?

He got elected on a very keen psychological insight.

Yes his handlers may have been smart.

He performed his puppet duties then for the masters that were then in play. But Trump freed the horse from these masters.

Who are the masters? Trump has surrounded himself by more jewish bankers than any president and if you're not referring to them, then I can't imagine who you think is ruling the world.

Look at Bushes face during the Trump inauguration. That was the first time he really looked confused. All the other stuff was sardonic clowning.

Dude: "Bush's face". Sardonic clowning was having the country screwed by Dick, Bush and Colin

Also of course the minor detail that Trump saved your skin from nuclear burns. Either you are too ignorant of what was happening in Europe under Clintons Statesec stewardship or or you dont take it all that gravely - in both cases, you're trivial in these matters despite a good IQ.

I don't know what the problem is in your mind, why convictions don't connect to arguments if not a kind of virginity before the real world. The left is made out of such symptoms of inexperience, IQs go to waste in glib non sequiturs with a few sprinkled factoids.

I don't know what disconnects you're referring to. Trump gave a huge tax cut to rich people. Then he raised taxes on the poor via Gorsuch breaking the tie (5-4) in favor of internet sales taxes. He also threatened a gas tax. And then his tariffs are another tax on the poor because the corps will not cut salaries for management in effort to eat the cost, but pass costs along to consumers which is what will cause the next stock crash as the consumers are out of money. When consumers are out of money, it's the end of the game. They're up to their eyeballs in debt, wages are stagnant despite a worker shortage (corps would prefer hiring druggies and felons than to raise the wage to attract quality people), and Trump has disrupted the redistributive flow of money via taxation by giving corps a YUGE tax cut which didn't go into wages nor capital equipment nor supplies, but stock buybacks because rich people are already drowning in money and have nothing else to do with it. Supply-side economics is absolutely retarded!

Id like to see you try t hold up in a conversation with Trump. He'd first ask you what youve done.I imagine you'd have nothing to say, and Id like to see you worm your way out of that, and him smiling and patting you on the back like with Ali G.

It would be like arguing with an evangelical preacher because Trump lives in his own world where facts are conjured on the fly.

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” George Carlin.

Intelligence that connects hypotheticals is not the same as intelligence that tests itself. The two species both occur at once in a powerful mind, but - well you see where im going with this. Or no you probably don't. I mean that you need to fucking go out and verify your claims before you develop a really slick shell of self indulgent slime and actually start becoming dumb.

Intelligence is simply perception. As Goethe said, there is no difference in thinking and seeing.

"Intelligence that tests itself" I'm taking to mean intellectual humility or lack of arrogance in one's position; openmindedness, objectivity, etc. To me, that's the defining characteristic of intelligence because the only sure stumbling block to truth is the conviction that you already have it. So the way to be dumb is to believe you know everything already and the hallmark of the ignorant is the referral to "common sense."

No, that does not make me a hero. If I walked into that building knowing that some sniper could be somewhere waiting to shoot me for voting at all and knowing this, I still walked into that building and voted, that might make me a hero. The men and women in the armed forces who are overseas - they are heroes.

Despite how you feel now you already did your part in protecting millions of Arabs from isis armies of death.

Not really but from your point of view, I do understand what you mean here. Trump did begin by doing his part but the fat lady is not finished singing as of yet and will not be for quite some time. Hopefully he will be able to do more *of his part* in this regard before he leaves office. There are a lot of *real* heroes out there working together and doing their part.

To vote for Trump despite the social pressure, especially as a woman, shows a compassionate heart and independent mind.

I never really thought of it that way. I just wanted change. Would you dare compare me to a Rosa Parks or a Harriet Tubman or the men and women of the French Underground, et cetera? But I enjoy hyperbole.

Would you compare me to her below? Now she was another hero. I am no hero. I think that perhaps because you believe that Trump is some kind of a hero, those who voted for him might also be? But maybe you are losing the term lightly.

Well to call someone an imbecile is basically ending the discussion. And I think that was probably the point.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Perhaps simply his modus operandi. I am among good company insofar as that goes.

People get hurt quick when their race or gender is being generalized and attacked. We all see the ugliest sides of us all because of it.

True but this is not what was happening. It was simply a case of someone enjoying name calling, having become so used to it. Sometimes our patterns will become deeply embedded within us. But there is a delete button and people can think twice.

Me: ....I think that men and women need to learn to put themselves in each other's places. You used the word *empathy* above. That does call for empathy and openness and a willingness to do just that. I wonder how many individuals are capable of that? We are fearful, stubborn creatures who like to exist within our own comfort zone, unwilling to reflect and to take that leap into the dark to see how the other might feel.

You: Yes, I think now it is time for women to place themselves in mens shoes.

Do you see what you just did there?

Where Im from at least men are virtually an extinct species when it comes a mans Mind.

That statement begs the question: Where are you from? You need not answer though. So are you saying that you live in a matriarchal environment? So how do you plan to change that ~~ to balance that out?

Do you realize how many women down through the ages might have been capable of making that same statement that you did above just changing *men* to *women*? But women fought to change that in many ways and it is still being done. Fight (with your voice) to be heard, barbarianhorde. I am not being flip here.

In America it is less bad. I think women do still put themselves in mens shoes here and there, there,

Give me examples please.

I always figured women were essentially more keen and smart than men until groups of women started attacking men in very ungracious ways.

Smart in what way? Are you speaking of native intelligence? Let us not forget that attacking someone is at the emotional level. This happens when we do not deal with our anger and rage and do not resolve issues which we have. There are women who hate men and vica versa.

I slowly realized many women are worthless pieces of trash, just like I knew many men are. Just, selfish, blind, black galled sadistic masochistic and irrational and loud, totally good for noting except causing miserable times for other people especially their children if they have them.

So how do you generally handle this kind of knowledge after coming to this realization? Do you allow it to eat away at you or do you let it go at some point?

Now, I only respect people who prove to be worthy of my respect. Like you, for example.

Can you really know that I deserve your respect? You see one little facet of who and what I am.

For me the issue was never whether women were equal to me, it was more if men could be equal to women. But thats how I grew up.

Equal in what way? Perhaps you did grow up in a kind of matriarchal household. Again, equal in what way?

And how a lot of boys are now growing up, even worse. They are taught it is fundamentally bad to be a male. Some will end up rapists. I can feel it coming in the air tonight. Oh yeah.

I wonder if, with the rapist, it is only an excuse to rape? Who is it who is teaching these males that it is bad to be male?At second glance, I have to ask the question: What does it mean to you to be fundamentally male?

And girls are being taught it is fundamentally good to be a girl. So they grow up without compassion, without knowing good from bad.

I enjoy being a female. I do not understand though how the first part leads to the second part. Perhaps if the second part is the case, it is because these girls were not taught what it means to be a human being FIRST of all.

But thankfully all smart humans will step out of this machine and join the new movement where it is taken for granted that gender isn't a criterium for human worth, as we always diD

.

That is not such a new movement, barbarianhorde. Women have been trying to help many men, not all men, but many, and also many women, downtrodden women, to realize that men and women are equal when it comes to gender and humanity. What kind of man in his right mind would have felt that women ought not to vote, that they could not possibly ever know who to vote for? What kind of human being would have felt that African Americans or anyone for that matter did not have the right to learn how to read and write and to be free?

Only stupid people think it was ever really an issue. Because it was only ever really an issue with stupid people. If you read literature and correspondences up to the 19 century man always respected woman far more than a feminist does. If women don't like that sort of respect, then I think that is sad.

Define *stupid people* for me, barbarianhorde. Give me an example of how men respected women up to the 19th century? Are you speaking of how they may have worshiped/idolized them, lusted after them, made them into goddesses? Is that necessarily respecting them ~~ in other words, taking another look, looking back and seeing them for who they really are? Are women to simply be put on a pedestal and adored? Are we not to be the partners and helpmates of the men, are we not to come into our own, to evolve, to become more than what men and even other women think or thought that we ought to be?

As I put in another post, women are already doing that. Firefighters, police officers, soldiers, astronauts,(not sure how many there are) pilots, fighter pilots, truck drivers lol, ad continuum. Have you ever heard of Rosie the Riveter?

I like strong characters, good human beings, people who stand up for their family, etcetera.

So, you do not see some that I named above as standing up for family or the larger family, the country?

I don't care what job they have. I think an ER nurse is much rougher than a fighter pilot, as is a forth grade teacher. FAR more important. A fighter pilot is just a lucky basterd. Like an astronaut.

Yes, I can see how an ER nurse would have to have some tough qualities but not a fighter pilot? Why would you diminish the fighter pilot? True, hopefully fighter pilots are lucky but they are also skilled and disciplined and courageous, right? Let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater here, barbarianhorde.

Empathy necessarily leads to womens rights,

Empathy, among other things, like intelligence, a sense of justice and fair play, a rise in consciousness.

.... but womens rights don't necessarily lead to empathy. Thats what I see in the world.

This might just be true but without the woman's rights, that individual person or woman who does have empathy and compassion might not be able to achieve what it would take to create a better world. Does this make any sense to you at all?

I think it is because along with womens rights we also are taught male guilt.

Can you explain that to me. Who is it who is teaching male guilt - the men who are against a woman having rights or do you see it as women doing this to men?

So that good men are obstructed in favour of hypocrites and rapists, elected by their fancy talk about how women are superior while they rape women left rand right.

I need an example here. I am not getting this at all.

Its just a bit insulting to forget the millions of MEN that fought for womens right and died for it.

I do not forget anyone, men or women, who fought for *human* rights and died for it or luckily did not die. You need to remember this when you speak of the ER nurse being better than the fighter pilot. You kind of denigrate her.

It is something I hate, to always shove responsibility for someones actions away from that someone to a hypothetical other, or just automatically to his parents.

This IS something which we do need to teach our children otherwise they grow up to be narcissists and so-called privileged characters running away from the consequences of their own actions. Of course, sometimes parents do play a part in the child's development or lack of it but at some point, some age, that individual needs to learn that from a certain moment onward he or she is responsible, can be responsible for self, as an adult.

I believe in the soul. I believe we come to the world as a defined character.

I do not know if we have a soul. We do have a psyche and I do not believe that we are already defined when we are born into this world. I kind of think that we grow into our selves bit by bit through experience, intelligence, consciousness, knowledge, ad continuum.

This is a lengthy endless discussion, but just to let you know I put responsibility for torture always only strictly with the torturer. All else perpetuates it.

I can probably agree with this just as long as you remember how the torturer came to be the torturer. Responsibility is on him or her and the accepting of consequences but at the same time, are there any gray areas here? I am not even sure where I would go with that.

What do you mean by "They all were very surprised when they finally let me talk."

They finally realized I wasn't crazy, or cruel, or violent. For years people would walk out of the room or scream and laugh and cry whenever I opened my mouth to try to defend against accusations - it was from a slapstick movie really, I couldn't do much because everyone was in on it and they all would turn to emotional wrecks as soon as I tried to defend myself, I was the Satan, the scapegoat. I didn't know why and still don't.

I am glad that things are much better for you now. That was a horrible thing which you had to experience. There is a beautiful part of humanity and an ugly, malicious one. That is the inhumane part...like the lynching or the burning at the stake, et cetera.

A lesbian friend of mine said it was penis envy. She said some lesbians are so frustrated about not being a man they do nothing rather than cut a mans dick off, if not real than psychologically.

Well, that is one radical opinion. It may be true for some individuals.

I know you won't take this seriously, because you just don't know this sort of life. But its all pretty damn ugly and real for Northern Europe. Blackmail using the weaknesses of family members because boys are usually very compassionate to their family especially of course their mom. Get to the mom and you get to the boy. Thats how they play it, the feminists.

I am not so sure what I would call these individuals but certainly not a real feminist. They are really radical haters of men or misandrists probably more radical than some mysogynists. Perhaps something within their brains, their minds, became so warped or could it have been as a result of their own personal journey. These two kinds of individuals are like cancerous growths to me.

Did you know there was an actual worked doctrine here in the 80s which said that moms should deprive their sons of love? My mom wad very upset at it then, but it was actually written in popular magazines - feminism is pretty hard core here. So you forgive me if I don't admire the movement so much.

I can understand how you feel but you are throwing the baby out with the really, extreme dirty water.

Women have many more rights these days, here in Europe. For example the right to abortion is one right a man doesn't have. A man doesn't get to decide to kill his baby. Only a woman gets to decide to kill her and that mans baby. Just one of those things.

It is more or less the same in the states and I really feel for those men who have no say in their child being aborted. I also feel more for the unborn child who was an inconvenience or an unplanned visitor to the family simply because the mother or both the mother or father did not have the wisdom or the discipline or the intelligence to plan ahead. This country is a throw-away country. We value our things and pleasures more than we value our children.

Happy for me is being in creative action, which always is a state of love.

I can relate to that. Why is it a state of love?

I think that it is only within those moments when we experience perhaps some kind of perfection and completeness within us, perhaps when we are somewhere in the zone or in the pocket doing something which we love or which is a struggle, and I know that I have, when everything just seems to come together, somehow. Could we appreciate those moments if they were not so rare?

Yes, they now make up most of my life. I worked all my life for this special intimacy with the cosmos. It grows and grows until it overtakes the whole experience of life.

Sounds wonderful. Would you call yourself a mystic?

This means that all of life becomes a meaningful struggle, with of course moment sof accomplishment and relief, but never of just trivial or arbitrary labour for causes you might not value or watching tv to zone out or endless small talk to pass time and avoid the truth. None of that exists for me now, only the juicy truth of the struggle to crack the cosmic egg, unite the two worlds the eternal and the not fleeting.

I am glad that you also see it as a struggle.

Like dust in a dance, what exists, the dust, or the dance?

I say the dance.

I think that it can be both. Makes for more drama like the sandstorm in a desert. lol

So what do you think of that image ~ spooky spam ~ "so whose going to take one for the team and kill Cavanaugh and the fact that 28 actually liked it?"

Do you think that this person, woman or man (can we know for sure) needs to take responsibility for her/his words? She may or may not have meant it but there are a lot of crazies out there, and I would include her or him within that group, even if she was just sadly looking for attention, showing off which makes her no less responsible for her stupidity and callousness.

Personally, I would have her or him spend some time in jail. Words can be extremely powerful and can have terrible consequences. If we want to indulge in such *freedom of speech* which can cause harm to others, we must be prepared to *pay the piper*.

The sad thing is that it is too late for the person who has been harmed or killed. We really do live in an insane world.

Do you consider this to be "freedom of speech" which should be allowed?I am not even sure if it ought to be allowed even though the person would have to take responsibility for it legally speaking. But we cannot stop people from what they say unfortunately or can we? Things like this being said. The repercussions come too late for narcissists and so-called privileged characters who believe they have the right to spill this venom.

I thin it should be allowed in privater but not in print, there are so many examples of death threats and fictions of the death of the people we love, and it was printed in such classy magazines and newspapers and still is -

Well, there is really not much to be done about it in private except for not joining in and also speaking up against it. If we are not in some way part of the solution we are still a part of the problem. My intuition is that you may have already learned that.

I think the people running these media outlets deserve the punishment of living their miserable shitty lives without the power to impose that misery on other lives.

Well, there does seem to be a rise in consciousness hopefully going on and hopefully it will continue. People like *spooky spam* need to accept the consequences of callous irresponsible and unconscionable speech and so does the media which is not diligent and watchful.

“How can a bird that is born for joySit in a cage and sing?” ― William Blake